Suggestion So I've been a memeber since 1998....

[Ttam Legacy]

And now my membership is based on how many posts I've made??? I'm.... "WELL KNOWN"?? I'd rather be a Founding Member....

 

[Ttam Legacy]

Cause I'd much rather put my trust in someone that has been a member for 4 years with a ton of posts then trust a member that has been around for 21 years.

 

[Art Andrews]

There is certainly something to be said about longevity, but a community filled with people who simply have a membership is no community at all. We won't apologize for placing a stronger emphasis on active participation as it is what makes an online community thrive.

 

[vader45]

I agree with Art. We are here to participate in discussion not simply to be another account holder. That's not why Art is paying to keep this forum alive. There are other ways to throw money in the trash.

 

[teecrooz]

I’ve come around to the same conclusion. Participation is key. I know I’ve posted a lot more in the past few years than I did in my early years.

The only metric that I still see some issue with though is the post to like ratio. It favors newer members because older members didn’t have a “like” button back in the day, making it harder to achieve that metric if their posts were prior to the implementation of the like feature. It’s not a very point heavy metric. Not the end of the world, just something I noticed.

 

[Jedifyfe]

Expected Respect vs Earned Respect

 

[xl97]

Convince me!

I'm adult enough to be open to change my thinking/stance on things if a legit argument/stance can be pitched that makes sense. (but for now.. I think contribution is something that needs to not only be acknowledged, but respected in that it IS what truly builds a community)

I mean a forum with 100000 members who no posts doesnt really have a benefit to anyone... does it?


I see only 148 posts? of what? (I didnt search them)..

Helping others?
Posting findings or tutorials or how-to's? (something that was/is beneficial to other members?)

Sooooooooooooo.. roughly 7 posts...... A YEAR?

Is that what this boils down to?

Do you honestly think that is being an active/contributing member? (I'm serious... do you consider that 'active' enough?)

New topics
New tech
New techniques
New tutorials/How-to's
Responses to those who need help sharing your experience..

If none of the above was done, or held as beneficial.... the forum/community wouldnt be as big or popular as it is today.

I'm not saying that being an early member is nothing... but it is if you havent been adding to the community.

I mean.. spam bots might have more contribution if going by 'time' alone..

 

[Art Andrews]

I’ve come around to the same conclusion. Participation is key. I know I’ve posted a lot more in the past few years than I did in my early years.

The only metric that I still see some issue with though is the post to like ratio. It favors newer members because older members didn’t have a “like” button back in the day, making it harder to achieve that metric if their posts were prior to the implementation of the like feature. It’s not a very point heavy metric. Not the end of the world, just something I noticed.

You make a valid argument. Heavy posters from yester-year would have a hard time achieving a high like to post ratio.

 

[Ttam Legacy]

I can see everyone's point. I guess I'm just a quiet member. lol.

 

[Art Andrews]

I can see everyone's point. I guess I'm just a quiet member. lol.

Nothing wrong with being a lurker. There are far more of those than active members and everyone is welcome here.

 

[Duncanator]

I can see everyone's point. I guess I'm just a quiet member. lol.

And I think it's pretty cool that you've been a member for so long! I didn't even know it existed till ten years after you joined.

Ya, "titles" are cool, but they don't get you a free coffee at Starbucks. I think Art and the gang did a pretty good job of coming up with titles that all sound good once you get past "New".